Rubio on immigration: I think Republicans have reached a point of “irreconcilable differences” with Obama

posted at 3:01 pm on April 18, 2014 by Allahpundit

A nice catch by Charlie Spiering and a rare “I told you so” opportunity for me. A few days ago, Mickey Kaus argued that it’d be tough for the GOP to pass an immigration bill next year or in 2016 without sinking Rubio’s presidential chances. I disagreed, just because I assume Rubio will end up opposing any new amnesty bill that emerges from a deal between the House and Senate. Specifically:

If Rubio decides this year he’s running, he’ll stay far away from the next immigration reform effort. The Gang of Eight bill that he quarterbacked will be officially dead once this congressional session ends so he won’t be stuck defending that anymore if he doesn’t want to. What I expect, in fact, is that once Obama makes a move this year to reduce deportations, Rubio will seize it as an excuse to throw up his hands and declare that reform is pointless as long as O’s in charge. He’s now come to realize, he’ll say, that the current president simply can’t be trusted to enforce the laws responsibly and therefore reform should be postponed until 2017 at the earliest. (Never mind that in the past Rubio’s used Obama’s unilateralism as a reason for why Congress should hurry up and pass reform right away.) That’ll ease some fears on the right about him, no matter what the House ends up doing.

Was I right? Here’s what he told the Texas Tribune yesterday, via Spiering. Skip to 41:30 of the clip below for the key bit.

“I think this administration has probably reached the point of irreconcilable differences with regards to trust, particularly among Republicans,” Rubio explained during a conversation at a Texas Tribune event on Tuesday.

Rubio pointed out that Obama’s abuse of executive power, particularly in the decision not to enforce immigration laws, was a crucial error. He characterized it as “extremely problematic” to any consensus.

Rubio admitted that the comprehensive approach to immigration reform had failed, stating that in the current political climate, it would be difficult to get any comprehensive approach to anything done.

He doesn’t say explicitly that he can no longer support immigration reform until O’s out of office but that’s clearly the upshot of the point about trust and “irreconcilable differences,” no? If you don’t trust the chief executive to enforce the laws you’ve passed and there’s no way to rebuild that trust, then logically you’re a no on reform until 2017. That’s how I’m reading this. My pal Karl adds a sly caveat, though:

@allahpundit I'd bet Rubio is a no on any immigration deal that emerges until Jeb is officially out.

Right now Rubio needs to impress the right, in case he decides to run for president as a compromise choice between the establishment and tea partiers. And the first order of business there, naturally, is to make amends with conservatives over immigration. That means voting no on anything that comes down the pike on immigration — not because it’ll fully convince righties that he’s changed on immigration but because such ostentatious pandering to them might make him tolerable as an alternative to, say, Jeb Bush and Rand Paul. If, however, Jeb decides not to run, then Rubio might try to fill his niche as the establishment champion, in which case the “vote no” plan is out the window. As the donor class’s candidate of choice, he’d have to vote yes.

Or … would he? Is it really true, at this point, that establishment Republicans would reject Rubio if he voted no on a new immigration deal this summer? I don’t think so. On the contrary — so long as passage was assured I think they’d encourage him to vote no, precisely because they realize that he needs to rebuild his conservative cred. Beltway Republicans might hate the base but they hate low turnout in elections even more. And by quarterbacking the Gang of Eight bill in the media last year, Rubio’s already proved to them that he’ll be a loyal ally on amnesty if/when he’s president. Having proved his good faith, he’s now free to oppose future immigration deals in the name of protecting himself politically, provided as his opposition doesn’t put any deal at risk. Otherwise he really will have to suck it up and vote yes.

Ultimately, I think what the donor class really requires in a nominee in 2016 is a guy who can draw a sharp contrast with Mitt “Self-Deportation” Romney on this issue. They want to be able to show Latino voters that they’ve changed on immigration since 2012, even if that change hasn’t produced anything tangible in Congress. Rubio can do that for them no matter how he votes on amnesty going forward. Between his sponsorship of the Gang of Eight bill, his rhetoric encouraging legalization, and of course his heritage, he can sell the “different kind of Republican” angle even if (especially if?) nothing passes the House.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Right, just when Boehner says he’s “hellbent” on passing amnesty this summer, and one of the main reasons is that he has got to rush it through now before 2015 because then it would likely be much harder to pass amnesty after the Repubs have got even more house seats, and have taken control of the senate.

Of course if Boehner passes amnesty the Repubs won’t win those seats. Conservatives are going to stay home this fall, not vote, en masse, by the millions and millions in a mass movement against the Rubios and Boehners and Canters of the party. The Repubs would probably lose the house in they passed amnesty.

Of course if Boehner passes amnesty the Repubs won’t win those seats. Conservatives are going to stay home this fall, not vote, en masse, by the millions and millions in a mass movement against the Rubios and Boehners and Canters of the party. The Repubs would probably lose the house in they passed amnesty.

anotherJoe on April 18, 2014 at 3:10 PM

If Boehner passes Amnesty I am never voting Republican again, and nor should anyone. We HAVE to form our own party.

Sorry, but Rubio’s destroyed his credibility on this issue. I still don’t know why he wants to run for President instead of the Senate in 2016. He’s not gonna win the nomination. If it’s a Senator who gets the nod, it’ll be Rand Paul(or maybe Ted Cruz if Paul stumbles). If the base goes with a governor, Scott Walker seems like the odds-on favorite(with Mike Pence or Rick Perry being darkhorse candidates). Anyone else would be a retread that smacks of desperation(Jeb, Huckster, Romney Version 3.0).

1. He was a liberal on immigration – worse than a bunch of Democrats – when he was Speaker here in Florida. He then flipped and reinvented himself as immigration hardliner when he ran against Charlie Crist in 2010.

2. Savely arrived in DC, he then flopped again and joined McCains gang activities for Comprehensive Immigration Deform.

3. And now he looks at his poll numbers again, just as he did in the 2010 primaries and hopes that conservatives are dumb enough to not a mind a third flip-flop.

If you let such a sleazebag get away with stuff like that, you deserve to be ruled by such men.

The thing is, once people know you’re a liar liar pants on fire, its hard to go back.

This is the same guy who guaranteed that the Senate bill would deal with immigration enforcement first. While doing so, he truthfully admitted to Spanish viewers that amnesty would absolutely come first.

In short, what Karl is saying is Rubio is a “no” until the 2016 lame-duck session, after Hillary Rodham Aberdin Clinton (yes, poly”marriage” will be 2016′s gay “marriage”) whups Jeb Bush.

Steve Eggleston on April 18, 2014 at 3:43 PM

I think the Rs already know that they have absolutely NO chance of ever getting back this country and so they are just doing whatever they are being told to do under the deal they cut for themselves . After the Piece Of Shiite,
it’s the WahaBillary’s turn now and nothing can stop them .

Let me get this straight. The president AND the attorney general refuse to enforce the “laws of the Untied states”, thus violating their oaths, and the Republicans aren’t up in arms about it and screaming impeachment on the floor of the House and the Senate? The Republicans are still not taking the Democrats to task for the Dems collusion in the violation of oaths of office? Is that about it?

If it’s a Senator who gets the nod, it’ll be Rand Paul(or maybe Ted Cruz if Paul stumbles).

Doughboy on April 18, 2014 at 3:37 PM

Rand speaks his heart, just like Rubio does in front of “his” audience.
h/t Free Beacon.

Sen. Rand Paul (R., Ky.) denied that a nuclear Iran would pose a national security threat to the United States or Israel in a 2007 radio interview with talk show host and conspiracy theorist Alex Jones.

“Even our own intelligence community consensus opinion now is that they’re not a threat. Like my dad [Rep. Ron Paul] says, [the Iranians] don’t have an Air Force, they don’t have a Navy,” said Paul, according to a recording of the interview. “You know, it’s ridiculous to think they’re a threat to our national security.”

“It’s not even that viable to say they’re a national threat to Israel,” Paul added. “Most people say Israel has 100 nuclear weapons, you know.”

There is ZERO evidence the “donors” want Rubio. There are some large donors, mainly those associated with either the Chamber of Commerce or big companies, who are pro-immigration reform including either amnesty or a “path to citizenship,” but there’s been no indication that the issue is all that important to them – other than the frantic wailing of pundits about it.

The rest is just baseless speculation.

But keep rattling the cage, the monkeys jumping around and screeching entertains the children.

Could we at least stand strong on the language? Thats the daqmn problem with politicians, they’ve forgotten how to talk, especially on our side of the aisle.

If i was the candidate, my speech short n sweet….

“This issue has NEVER been about “Immigration” Its about ILLEGAL immigration.

If the 10-30 million ILLEGALS that are here are given anything other than the boot either to their country of origin to go “back of the line” then it IS AMNESTY, period. Not gonna happen on my watch.

Any person that comes to these shores, following the rules established for our Natural Born citizens, following the laws set by the States & the US Congress, and are willing to contribute to the betterment of the Republic you are of COURSE welcome…all other need not apply.

America will always work for any person, if they are willing to put in the work to keep it that way. If you’re here for anything less, it won’t and frankly, why would you want to come then?”

Simple to the point. Just being here isn’t enough to make you a citizen, you gotta work at it.

Rubio on immigration: I think Republicans have reached a point of “irreconcilable differences” with Obama

It’s clear to me that w/r to ILLEGAL immigration (damnit, you f*ckwit, no one is b1tching about IMMIGRATION, stop using the stupid language of the left), Republicans have reached a point of “irreconcilable differences” with their own base.

I’ve got two simple requirements for the person I’d back. First: Have executive experience running a state or large corporation. Rubio doesn’t qualify. Second: Be committed to the rule of law. (Jeb, what’s love got to do with it?)

I love your stories about how America opened up opportunity for you and your hard-working parents. You have much to be proud of and I never get tired of hearing these stories from you but also from many, many, others.

But you decided to fly too close to the sun and opted to throw in with seven other Senators to craft an amnesty scheme that is clearly the McCain/Kennedy plan with different language. Strike one.

Then you defended the amnesty scheme differently on Spanish language television than you did on English language television. Glibly telling Spanish speakers that once the law passes all that pathway to citizenship stuff is meaningless because the illegals would have standing that would make amnesty inevitable. This shows a real deficit of character. Strike two!

Finally, you’ve gone utterly silent on the issues that matter. The economy, international affairs, and national security. You’re a first term Senator with aspirations for higher office….. Yet you’re essentially pulling and Obama and voting present so as not to leave a record. Strike three dude- you are out.

Rubio is welcome to do whatever he wants to on immigration, but I will never support him. He has shown himself to be dishonest by being a vociferous opponent of “immigration reform” when it benefited him in Florida politics and then turning around and becoming Shumer’s bu**boy on open borders legislation last year.

Why doesn’t Rubio call his puppet master Shumer out on the latter’s blatant efforts to destroy the Republican Party in concert with the Administration using the raw discretionary power of the IRS and manipulation of campaign finance laws? If he were willing to label Shumer as the bullying Nazi that he is, I might gain a littler more respect for him.

I’ve got two simple requirements for the person I’d back. First: Have executive experience running a state or large corporation. Rubio doesn’t qualify. Second: Be committed to the rule of law. (Jeb, what’s love got to do with it?)

debg on April 18, 2014 at 4:34 PM

Third: Mean what he or she says. Once you lie you can never be trusted again. You can be wrong but you can’t lie.

Right now Rubio needs to impress the right, in case he decides to run for president as a compromise choice between the establishment and tea partiers.

LOL!

Screwbio is a dead man walking here in Florida. No one pays attention to a damn thing he says. We are fed up with his drama queen BS and pandering to the base which has fallen on deaf ears. His word means nothing here. He will never win re-election let alone Florida’s 29 electoral points.

There is nothing TEA about Screwbio. He is Bush Mafia establishment 100%. He is TEA in corrupt Bush Mafia political consultants plundering delusional minds!

It’s the corruption, STUPID! And Screwbio is the poster boy of corruption.

He has no moral compass. He cares about nothing and no one but Marco Freakin’ Rubio.

He’s burnt Bush Mafia T.O.A.S.T. Not to mention that he is just not that intelligent and he has NO EXECUTIVE EXPERIENCE.
He’s Obama 2.0.

I’m sure that corrupt Jeb has a job lined up for “The Legend in His Own Mind” on K-Street.

Rubio will never be forgiven by the right because many of them are Christians.

John the Libertarian on April 18, 2014 at 5:59 PM

Because Christ taught to hold a grudge forever and never forgive.

John the Libertarian on April 18, 2014 at 6:00 PM

Forgiveness has to start with Rubio – and so far he has not apologized for his LIES, or sought forgiveness, and he continues to LIE every chance he gets. The “grudge” being held against Rubio is less an issue than the trust he has lost going forward. Even if Rubio were “forgiven” for the long list of LIES has told to America since 2009, he will never be trusted by thinking people ever again, because he has proven himself to be a pathological liar, and completely untrustworthy.

Forgiveness is not forgetting and it never leads to new trust.
Forgiveness is the letting go of hatred and bitterness in yourself towards the person in question. It is not an absolving of the wrong.
New trust comes from admitting you wronged someone. Repenting of that wrong. And then working towards ensuring that you will not repeat in the future that wrong. When you show that you can be trusted, then people might start trusting you again. When you show that you plan to repeat the wrong, how does that build any bridge to trust?

John the Tyrant. Anything that gives the Democrats 10 to 20 million net new voters seems to be your desire.

If you wait for the person who wronged you to forgive, you could be waiting for eternity. Since god does want you to forgive, what does that mean? It does not mean to forget the wrong, or to ignore that the wrong exists. What it means is to get rid of the hatred that the wrong fills you with so you have a clean spirit with which to love god with.

Rubio will never be forgiven by the right because many of them are Christians.

John the Libertarian on April 18, 2014 at 5:59 PM

Christians will forgive the wrong that Rubio caused them, and everyone else. What they will not do is trust him until he proves he can be trusted. There is a difference between the two. Forgiveness has nothing to do with Rubio. Trust has everything to do with Rubio. He lost the trust. Just as a Christian who has harmed the congregation might be put out of the church, even though every member forgives the sins committed, until the person rights himself with God he is destructive towards their cause and must remain outside the flock.

For conservatives Rubio convinced us that he was a certain man with certain convictions. He has since proven that those convictions never existed. He no longer is a member of conservatism and is not welcome until he admits his errors, repents of his errors and becomes right with conservatism.

I think it’s a perfect description. Sort of hilarious/bizarre coming from Rubio, but he is making an impressive effort to recover from what looked like career-fatal treachery on amnesty. As Karl notes, he is now one of the options to the right of Jeb Bush, who will get exactly zero conservative support.

Illegal aliens should be arrested and deported. In the sixties in California the Monterey sheriff department used to gather them up during the day and fly them back to Mexico the next morning at about 6:00 AM. Then they would repeat the cycle.

I can’t say I’m surprised. Even worse than this new flip flop is his new education bill, aka lets turn students into indentured servants while student loans have been made non dis-chargeable through bankruptcy.

I don’t blame Rubio for the immigraton reform bill, he had to put his money where his mouth is on immigration, but I am glad he has seen that it is impossible.

The media wants me to blame Rubio and other republicans, and so do libertarians (who have their own immigration problem that is no better, with Rand Paul.) Drinks of water, and bills that don’t pass can’t hurt me. Rubio is still useful to us, although not as the presidential candidate. On immigration, he is George W. Bush.

When we solve the immigration problems with serious permanent reform, and enforce our laws again, Rubio can come to the fore, and he will be good for our party. The media and the democrats want you to belittle him, because they can’t stand when the right has any heros. Remember the drinks of water, the immigration bill was a trap set by Schumer because Rubio couldn’t walk away from it, because of who some of his constituents are.